View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Opportunity Scoring |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  Product Discovery Experiment Canvas |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When opportunities need ranking by their effect, it makes importance and satisfaction directly comparable. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as an opportunity-score table and top outcomes. | When a controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover. | When experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-6 | 8-80 | 1-5 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Opportunity Score Table, Top Outcomes | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Completed Experiment Canvas, Success Metric | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | PrioritizationDiscoveryOutcomesNeeds | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |